USS Fitzgerald collision?? Please explain.

[speeder]

It's an awful thing and the only thing I have to add is that people sometimes forget that this type of military service can be dangerous even in (relative) peacetime. Fortunately, these accidents are rare but they definitely happen and the results are catastrophic. Dead is dead.

Awful.

[pavulon]

Originally Posted by tcar

Apples to Hippos?

You can use it if you wish. It's not copyrighted.

[BK911]

Hey Paul, we were battle buddies!
Spent time on the USS Kidd over in the gulf in the mid 80s.
We cruised around with the Lassale a few times.

But anyway,....

I was a radar operator and had watch stations in CIC and the bridge.
Can't understand how this happened.
Even if the freighter wanted to ram the warship, the warship should have been able to avoid the collision.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by BK911

Hey Paul, we were battle buddies!
Spent time on the USS Kidd over in the gulf in the mid 80s.

I was on FFG-37 for the Earnest Will ops with the Kidd, flying Sh-60B's, in 1987. The OinC of the H-2 Det on the Kidd was and is a good friend of mine.

Small world!

Best.

[fireant911]

I, too, am at a total loss on how this could happen but mostly I am deeply saddened that it did… I served on two different ships, both were destroyers (USS Dewey DDG-45 and USS Hewitt DD-966). My first ship was homeported out of Charleston, SC and my second was out of Yokosuka, Japan – the same place as this unfortunate incident.

I have no idea on how this could ever happen; however, once, back in around 1989 on my first ship, we had a weak Lieutenant that knew everything acting as the Officer of the Deck while we were in the Persian Gulf. As it was the midwatch and dark, little could be seen though he was repeatedly warned that we there was a craft close to us. The CIC guys and sonar techs were becoming very vocal but this Lieutenant refused to acknowledge that any danger existed! Luckily ‘Crash Collins’, as he was referred to after the fact, FINALLY wised up and recognized that there was a problem, a huge problem off the starboard bow. Luckily, the two ships did not collide.

Heck, any of the folks that have served in the Navy will speak of the dangers when two ships intentionally get close together (for refueling). It is a difficult and dangerous maneuver even in the best of circumstances. I also remember the times when other Navies would almost ‘play chicken’ with other ships and would refuse to divert their course – things got tense but never a collision…

It is inevitable that the Commanding Officer, Executive Officer, and the Officer of the Deck will be retired. I would not dismiss the possibility of criminal charges being brought up against the OOD. This should have never occurred. The Maritime laws in Japan have specific “rules in traffic routes” although I remember seeing a news report that stated ‘the right of way’ was not identified. This is a sad, sad story and should not have ever happened.

[SoCal911T]

I hope I'm wrong, but everything I've seen and read points to the Fitzgerald being at fault. I think the Fitzgerald will be scrapped because it looks like the hull was deformed by the impact.
Regardless of who was legally at fault, some Naval careers are over.

[DanielDudley]

It was the strawberries. I had them there.

[rusnak]

My thoughts are on those missing sailors. Did they get somehow blown out of the ship and lost at sea, or were they just crushed and are still inside the wreckage? My feeling is that of angst over whether they need to go search the sea for them, or try to recover remains inside the ship.

[Jolly Amaranto]

I believe they drown when the bulbous bow of the container ship punched a hole below the water line into their sleeping quarters.

[Scott Douglas]

News tonight said they were found inside the ship.

[rusnak]

Originally Posted by tcar

No, their bodies were found yesterday, in a flooded compartment. They'd been asleep in their berths.

Oh man, my prayers for their families.

[fingpilot]

The port bow of the container ship has witness marks. The damage on the DDG is midship starboard side.

Gonna be sum 'xplainin to do.

[John Rogers]

I remembered an early news cast said the container ship had changed course without any broadcast over marine channels of what they were going to do. If both ships were going parallel and the larger ship changed course, by the time the DDG62 caught it, the collision was unavoidable! In the 20+ years I was in the Navy, every ship I was on hit something or another ship/boat. The USS Enterprise CVN65 ran aground in the channel coming into Pearl Harbor because a large freighter moved into the middle of the waterway when they said they were going somewhere else. Fortunately the torpedo belt on the Big E just scraped heavily on the bottom! The USS Bainbridge CGN25, USS Truxtun CGN35 and USS Texas CGN39 all bumped/scraped into small freighters in the Singapore harbor when approaching anchor position!

One great item in this case was the fact the super structure was made of steel and not like earlier ships made of aluminum. It did hit right where the starboard radar array is located so there is not a lot of reinforcement steel in that area.

[Evans, Marv]

This is, I'm sure as far off as the moon, but what if this was the result of a cyber attack involving a foreign government or hackers trying out something used in battle? Both ships' systems compromised and put on collision courses while the navigation equipment indicated things were going as usual. Sort of like the struxnet malware that masked what was actually happening while Iran's processors were going out of control. Could explain the maneuver of the cargo ship and the lack of action on the part of the destroyer. Plus, maybe explain why not much info about the reason for it has emerged, although it's early in the episode. Nutty, I know but ????

[amazongreenie]

Marv, you wrote exactly what I was suspecting: the possibility of electronics getting hacked or jammed by some serious organized criminals (Russian submarine(s), North Korean spacecraft, etc..)
The U-turn by the commercial ship got me wondering about it being taken over by pirates and used as a battering ram (but, if that were the case) surely the Navy would throttle-down the destroyer and avoid collision at all costs UNLESS it was unexpectedly hacked or jammed and made inoperable or put into a sort of "limp mode" by the hacker or jammer.

..Will be following this story fully-alert !

[rusnak]

Whatever the means, whether hijacking or not, it seems as though our sailors were rammed on purpose.

[911_Dude]

Originally Posted by amazongreenie

Marv, you wrote exactly what I was suspecting: the possibility of electronics getting hacked or jammed by some serious organized criminals (Russian submarine(s), North Korean spacecraft, etc..)
The U-turn by the commercial ship got me wondering about it being taken over by pirates and used as a battering ram (but, if that were the case) surely the Navy would throttle-down the destroyer and avoid collision at all costs UNLESS it was unexpectedly hacked or jammed and made inoperable or put into a sort of "limp mode" by the hacker or jammer.

Thats what I dont understand. Why would the commercial ship make a drastic u turn prior to the collision? Doesnt make sense. It would be like an airliner just deciding to do a u turn. Doesnt happen unless there is some emergency.

[crustychief]

Pure speculation but here it goes, Watch standers may have become complacent and reliant on transponders giving them huge contact returns on their radar screens. I recall standing those watches and there is a lot of clutter in those areas ( Singapore, Hong Kong, Arabian gulf etc.) so to make it easier to see "legitimate ( IFF, Xpdr) tracks" you declutter. I would like to hear the Starboard lookout, and his reports were during that time. I hope everything is on the DDR (digital data recorder) and is recoverable.

[wdfifteen]

Seems odd that a freighter that large would be doing all that maneuvering. It had to take lot of fuel to do all that twisting and turning around. Burning fuel going nowhere is not good for profits.

[JJ 911SC]

Originally Posted by crustychief

Pure speculation but here it goes, Watch standers may have become complacent and reliant on transponders giving them huge contact returns on their radar screens. I recall standing those watches and there is a lot of clutter in those areas ( Singapore, Hong Kong, Arabian gulf etc.) so to make it easier to see "legitimate ( IFF, Xpdr) tracks" you declutter. I would like to hear the Starboard lookout, and his reports were during that time. I hope everything is on the DDR (digital data recorder) and is recoverable.

Yes, I would think they would have close-up Special Sea Dutymen (or the US version) that double the numbers of Lookouts and Deck officers. The bridge recording should shed a lot of lights on what happened.